1 NORTHWEST ENERGY EFFICIENCY ALLIANCE 2012 TV Early Retirement Feasibility Study Prepared for NEEA, PG&E, SMUD and SCE by Energy Solutions and Navitas

Consumer Electronics Market Assessment and Prioritization: TV Early Retirement Friday, Oct 26 th 2012

Executive Summary – Technology, Market, and EM&V 3 Pre-2008 large TV stock is much less efficient than current models. For practical reasons, a retirement program would be limited to plasma TVs. Retiring a 42”, pre-2008 plasma could save 140 – 240 kWh/unit. While there is a large installed base, many TVs are already recycled and the remaining opportunity decreases each year. Existing e-recycling programs create free-ridership and attribution concerns. Lack of information on pre-2008 power consumption and changes in operating hours make savings estimates highly variable and speculative, creating a significant EM&V risk.

Executive Summary – Program Design 4 Program would need to include a downstream and midstream incentive to influence both the consumer and recycler decision to participate. High consumer discount rate to influence consumer decision requires a high consumer incentive which is subject to significant free-ridership. Program has limited future and would likely not be able to exist beyond While savings are attractive on a per unit basis, limited, high-cost touch points and major EM&V risks make this measure unfeasible at this time.

Table of Contents Technology Characteristics Market Characteristics Program Design Integration With Broader Plug Load Strategy EM&V 5

Technology Characteristics

Glossary Liquid Crystal Display (LCD) technology for regulating color and light in a display Cold-Cathode Fluorescent Lamp(CCFL) light source for early LCD televisions. Televisions using this technology are commonly referenced as LCD. Light Emitting Diode (LED) light source for later LCD televisions. Televisions using this technology are commonly referenced as LED. Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) technology for displaying an image on a television 7

Technology Characteristics Summary 8 For practical reasons, program would have to be limited to plasma TVs. Retiring a 42”, pre-2008 plasma could save 140 – 240 kWh/unit. A key uncertainty is determining the operating hours that would have occurred without intervention. Average measure life is likely 2-3 years without additional study of secondary TV market. Installed plasma base continually being whittled away due to existing recycling programs.

Program Overview – What type of TVs should we target? 9 Program Goal: Provide rebate to households that decide to recycle their large pre-2008 TVs. Only working TVs would receive rebate. The recycled TVs would be decommissioned. ‘First generation’ plasma TVs are inefficient and offer best potential savings CRTs were common before 2006, but mostly for smaller screen sizes Smaller potential savings Technology already in decline, most will be recycled or no longer used within a few years (low or no resale value) Early LCDs (CCFL) used about 3x more energy than today’s LCDs (LED) Moderate savings, but not as high as Plasma TVs

Plasma TVs offer highest savings potential 10 Active Mode Power (Watts) Year of Manufacturer Baseline 3 Delta W ( All Tech vs baseline) Delta W ( Plasma vs baseline) Screen size bin All Technologi esLCD OnlyCRT only Plasma only All Qualified Models <=

Program efforts should be limited to plasma TVs To reduce consumer confusion, a program would likely need to accept all TVs of a specific display type. It would not be practical to only accept models from specific years. While large LCDs have potential energy savings, including them in a program would require that all LCDs, regardless of age and screen size be accepted for recycling. Therefore, a plasma-only recycling program makes the most sense because it limits screen sizes to 40” and above and a relatively inefficient technology. 11

Measure life of TV early retirement is very limited 12 The measure life is number of years that the TV would stay in use in the absence of a TV early retirement program. Based on this approach, program could likely only claim 2-5 years. Expected lifetime of older models is about 11 years (LBNL 1999). NOTE: NEEA has a measure life of 6.1 years that reflects how long it is in the first household, not its expected life reflected by this measure. Useful remaining life of retired TVs (assuming 2013 program): TVs sold in : 1-5 years TVs sold before 2003 will have reached the end of their expected life Similar to appliance recycling, pre-2003 TVs could potentially claim a 2 year ‘useful remaining life’ (only if TV is working)

Uncertainty in Hours of Operation Assumptions 13 For the TVs being recycled: Highly dependent on where the TV is located in the house and whether it is the primary TV, secondary TV, etc. For new TVs purchased to replace recycled TV? Assume that most of the time, the new TV will become the ‘most watched’ TV. All other TVs in the use will then be used for fewer hours (no research or data available to support this) TV Set Description Hours Watched: TV Set per day* Most Watched TV7.7 2 nd Most watched TV4.0 3 rd Most watched TV2.9 4 th Most watched TV2.4

Savings Calculation Methodologies 14 Developing savings estimates is a challenge because of uncertainty regarding hours of operation for the new TV, recycled TV, and all other TVs in the house Two broad savings calculation methodologies could be used (both assume that a new TV would be purchased) Cascade effect: New TV becomes primary TV, hours of operation change for all TVs in house Simplified approach: New TV replaces old TV (same hours) Preliminary Savings Estimates* *Based on retirement of 42” Plasma from 2006 Methodology Annual Savings (kWh)RebateCost per kWh Cascade Effect $50 $ $0.36 per kWh Simplified Approach240$50$0.21 per kWh

Market Characteristics

Market Characteristics - Summary 16 74% of households give away or re-sell their TV, so it stays in use. Key players i nclude retailers, recycling/donation Centers, and resale market Recycling center certification should be a program requirement Program could partner with retailers, recycling centers, or both 24% of households already recycle their TVs and so a program would need to demonstrate increase in this rate

Most Households Give Away or Sell Old TVs 17 How do households dispose of TVs?* 74% of households that dispose of a TV give it away or sell it, meaning that the TV remains in use. This extends the TVs EUL. About 24% already E-Cycle 11% will sell the TV (Large plasma TVs have higher resale value so this % may be higher for large TVs)

Overview of current e-recycling market 18 Most recycling centers are free, some charge a fee for pick-up (~$50-$150) Best Buy is the only major retailer to offer an electronics recycling program Fee ($100) for pickup of >32”, unless new TV is delivered* Most retailer stores will not accept/recycle large TVs The secondary resale market, such as craigslist or used electronics retailers would compete with program. Some large flat screen models are listed at >$100 on craigslist. Program incentive would have to be higher than potential re-sale value, making a program very

Program Requirement: Recycler Certification 19 To ensure that TVs are being recycled in a responsible way, the program would need require certification. Likely certifications include: e-Steward certified – only standard to ban export to other countries Launched in electronics recycling facilities are certified to-date Certification is supported by >70 environmental organizations (Greenpeace, Sierra Club, NRDC) R2 (Responsible Recycling) Standard Generally the industry accepted standard for recycling Some claim that R2 fails to adequately address the four biggest problems in the electronics recycling industry: -Export: the global dumping of e-waste -Prison recycling -Incineration of e-waste -Worker protections for recycling workers

Retail channel partners may have limited touch points If program approach uses a retailer partner, recycling is linked with touch point of new appliance purchase, similar to appliance recycling. Only the largest TVs require delivery service so this substantially limits the potential touch points. Most retailers do not have TV recycling programs and may be reluctant to set them up just for the program Part of rebate may go to cover retailer costs. Due to low-volume and high effort requirements, retailer incentive would have to be higher than current BCE program levels ($25). 20

Recycling center partner have high free-ridership risks TV drop off is generally free at recycling stations. Donation Centers (e.g. Goodwill) usually resells, only recycle if TVs is not working or cannot be sold May object to recycling working electronics Program will have to require proof of recycling Free ridership would substantially increase program costs High incentive requirements to recycling partner to cover opportunity cost. 21

Integration with plug load strategy 22 TV early retirement addresses the existing market which is not covered by BCE or T20 measures. TV early retirement has been studied but never implemented by a utility Limited long-term opportunity suggests that this will not be part of a long-term strategy.

EM&V and Program Design

EM&V risks are extremely high 24 High uncertainty in savings calculations, measure life, and partial use make baseline attempts extremely challenging and likely expensive. Free-ridership may be high if using the recycling partner channel. Joint downstream and mid-stream incentive requirement magnifies costs, increases attribution and free-ridership. Possible opposition from organizations receive donated TVs Limited power data makes energy savings calculations extremely difficult. These EM&V issues would require additional study before beginning a program.

Limited, high-cost touch-points and EM&V risks suggest that an early retirement program is not feasible 25 Program would need to include a downstream and midstream incentive to influence both the consumer and recycler decision to participate. High consumer discount rate to influence consumer decision requires a high consumer incentive which is subject to significant free-ridership. Program has limited future and would likely not be able to exist beyond While savings are attractive on a per unit basis, high free-ridership, significant EM&V risks, and high costs of program start-up make this measure unfeasible at this time.